- Anonymous said...
- Juli Henry said... The jury was obviously thinking about the constitution in our country, the law, and the way our judicial system works. They were following instructions extreemly well under the circumstances, which inolved lots and lots of media, and they were listening very carefully for EVIDENCE, which was never presented. The case was WEAK from the start, folks, realize it! The duct tape on Caylee's face was only evidence that there was duct tape on Caylee's face. It may be "common sense" to ASSUME it was Casey, and I am reasonably sure it was, but ASSUMPTIONS cannot amount to EVIDENCE! Our justice system simply cannot work that way. Why won't the populace look at themselves and ask why the State of Florida, or "The People" didn't work harder to bring a stronger case? That's where the disconnect took place. It wasn't the Jury. They did what they were supposed to do. Casey played this game very strategically from a what appeared to be a losing position. Had the prosecuting attorneys and law enforcement played by the rules, a stonger case would have resulted. This should be a lesson to everyone about arrogence.....prosecuting attorneys thought they were better/smarter/more educated/ect. than Casey, went to court with a sloppily prepared case, thinking it would be slam-dunk, because they were "better" then she, and look...they lost. _________ So, the Prosecution lost its case, because it was suffering from a superiority complex? Wow, that would be hilarious, if it weren't so fantastical and sad. When I clicked on your username, your profile page on Blogger popped up. You describe yourself there as a "professional troublemaker". In addition, one of your two blogs is a homage to "Tarot" readings, an occult practice based on fantasy and a deck of cards. How fitting, though, that Killer's defense team, along with the jury, would be complemented by the above poster, since their shenanigans in court, and the resulting unjust verdict, were routed in fantastical thinking, too.
This was what another poster over at Seamus O'Riley Statement Analysis had to say to me about my opinion that the jury in the Casey Anthony trial simply did their job, to the best of their ability, doing the best they could with the CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence that was presented to them. I am just amazed at the number of people in this country who do not understand our justice system and how it works. Yes; it looks very much like Casey Anthony is guilty of murdering her daughter. It really does; but in order to convict, a jury needs more than just assumptions and circumstantial evidence. Could the prosecution have obtained it? Yes, I think so, if they had gone to the trouble. I really think the prosecuting attorney felt that he was smarter and better educated that Casey Anthony, and that he could wrap this whole case up without actually doing any work, especially if he made sure the media got everyone agitated. Unfortunately, for the prosecution, our justice system doesn't work that way. And.....just look at Project Innocence and it's statistics! Personal feelings, assumptions, and circumstantial evidence have sent many an innocent person to jail! Even with Casey Anthony walking, I do not want to turn back the clock to the Salem Witch trials and no DNA evidence. I truly love this country and I don't want the presumption of innocent until proven guilty to change. Sorry, anonomous poster who doesn't like me because of my tarot cards, troublemaking career, and opinion which differs from yours. You feel that my thinking is "fantastical"? Well........if you thought they jury on the Anthony trial could convict with no evidence, YOUR thinking was obviously more "fantastical" than mine ever could be. And I did not compliment the jury. I called out the prosecution on a weak case because I did not think they cared about the child who got killed.
